t

,S3*

AMERICAN IMPERIALISM'^^

THE CONVOCATION ADDRESS DELIVERED ON THE
OCCASION OF THE T\VENT\ -SEVENTH CONVO-
CATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO.

BY

THE HON CARL SCHURZ,

JANUARY 4, i899.

AMERICAN IMPERIALISM.

The Convocation Address, delivered on the occasiofi of

the Tzventy-sevcnth Convocation! of the University

of Chicago, January ^, i8gg.

BY THE HON. CARL SCHURZ.

Y inviting me to address its faculty, its students,

and its friends upon so distinguished an occasion,

the University of Chicago has done me an honor for
which I am profoundly grateful. I can prove that
gratitude in no better way than by uttering with entire
frankness my honest convictions on the great subxct
you have given me to discuss — a subject fraught with
more momentous consequence than any ever submitted
to the judgment of the American people since the foun-
dation of our constitutional government.

It is proposed to embark this republic in a course of
imperialistic policy by permanently annexing to it cer-
tain islands taken, or partly taken, from Spain in the
late war. The matter is near its decision, but not yet
decided. The peace treaty made at Paris is not yet
ratified by the Senate; but even if it were, the question
whether those islands, although ceded by Spain, shall
be permanently incorporated in the territory of the
United States would still be open for final determina-
tion by Congress. As an open question therefore I shall

discuss it. • 1 J

If ever, it behooves the American people to think and
act with calm deliberation, for the character and future
of the republic and the welfare of its people now living
and yet to be bom are in unprecedented jeopardy. To
from a candid judgment of what this republic has been,

what it may become, and what it ought to be, let us
first recall to our minds its condition before the recent
Spanish War.

Our government was, m the words of Abraham
Lincoln, "the government of the people, by the
people, and for the people." It was the noblest
ambition of all true Americans to cany this demo-
cratic government to the highest degree of pei"-
fection and justice, m probity, in assured peace, ii\
the security of human rights, in progressive civilization ,
to solve the problem of popular self-government on the
grandest scale. a':d thus to make this republic the ex-
ample and guiding star of m-nkind.

We had invited the oppressed of ail nations to find
shelter here, and to enjoy with us the blessings of free
institutions. They came by the millions. Some were
not so welcome as others, but under the assimilating
force of American life in our temperate climate, v/hich
stimulates the v/orking energies, nurses the spirit of
orderly freedom, and thus favors the growth of democ-
racies, they became good Americans, most in the first,
all in the following generations. iVnd so with all the
blood- crossings caused by the motley immigration, we
became a substantially homogeneous people, united by
common political beliefs and ideals, by common inter-
ests, laws, and aspicHtions — in one v/oid, a nation. In-
deed, we were not without our dilficulties and embar-
rassments, but only one of them, tlie race antagonism
between the negroes and the whites, especially v\rh.eve
the negroes live in mass, presents a problem which so
far has batifled all efforts at practical solution in har-
mony with the spirit of our tree institutions, and thus
threatens complications of a grave character.

We gloried m the marvellous growth of our popula-
tion, wealth, pov/er, and civilization, and in the incal-
culable richness of the resources of our country, capable
of harboring three times our present population, and
of immeasurable further material development. Our
commerce with the world abroad, although we had no
colonies, and but a tnuall navy, spread with unprece-

aentecl rapidity. captur:::u: one icrcigr, r/.a,rk.er afcer an-
other, not only for the products of onr fanns, but also
■"or many of those of our manuiacturine iriclriscries, wiih
i-rospect of indefinite extension.

Pe?.ce reigned within our borders, and there was not
the faintest shadow of danger of foreign attack. Our
voice, whenever we chose to speak in the councils of
nations, was listened to w^ith respect, even the mightiest
sea-power en occasion yielding to us a deference far
beyond its habit in its intercourse with others. We
were considered ultimately invincible, if not invul-
nerable, in our continental stronghold. It was our
boast, nor that we possessed great and costly armies
and navies, but that we did not need any. This excep-
tional blessing was our pride, as it was the envy of the
world. We looked down with pitying sympathy on
other nations which submissively groaned under the
burden of constantly increasing armaments, and v,'e
praised our good fortune for having saved us from so
wretched a fate.

Such was our condition, such our beliefs and ideals,
such our ambition and our pnde, but a short year ago.
Had the famous peace message of the Czar of Russia,
w^ith its protest against growing militarism and its plea
for disarmament, reached us then, it would have been
hailed with enthusiasm by every American as a triumph
of our example. We might have claimed only that to
our republic, and not to the Russian monarch, belonged
the place of leadership in so great an onward step in the
progress of civilization.

Then came the Spanish War. A few vigorous blows
laid the feeble enemy helpless at our feet. The whole
scene seemed to have suddenly changed. According to
the solemn proclamation of our government, the war
had been imdertaken solely for the liberation of Citba,
as a war of humanity and not of conquest. But our
easy victories had put conquest within our reach, and
Avhen our arms occupied foreign territory, a loud de-
mand arose that, pledge or no pledge to the contrary, the
conquests should be kept, even the Philippines on

the other side or the globe, and that as to Cuba herself,
independence would only be a provisional formality.
Why not ? was the cry. Has not the career of the re-
public almost from its very beginning been one of ter-
ritorial expansion ? Has it not acquired Louisiana,
Florida, Texas, the vast countries that came to us
through the Mexican War, and Alaska, and has it not
digested them well ? Were not those acquisitions much
larger than those now in contemplation ? If the re-
public could digest the old, v,'hy not the new ? What
is the difference ?

Only look with an unclouded eye, and you will soon
discover dift'erences enough warning- you to beware
There are five of decisive importance.

1. All the former acqusitions were on this continent,
and, excepting Alaska, contigious to our borders.

2. They were situated, not in the tropical, but in the
temperate zone, where democratic institutions thrive,
and where our people could migrate in mass.

3. They were but very thinly peopled — in fact, with-
out any population that would have been in the way o€
new settlement.

4. They could be organized as territories in the usual
manner, with the expectation that they would presently
come into the Union as self-governing states with popu-
lations substantially homogeneous to our own.

5. They did not require a material increase of our
army or navy, ei'her for their subjection to our rule or
for their defense against any probable foreign attack
provoked by their being in our possession.

Acquisitions of that nature we might, since the slav-
ery trouble has been allayed, make indefinitely without
in any dangerous degree imperiling our great experi-
ment of democratic institutions on the grandest scale ;
without putting the peace of the republic in jeopardy,
and without depriving us of the inestimable privilege of
comparative unarmed security on a compact continent
which may, indeed, by an enterprising enemy, be
scratched on our edges, but is with a people like ours, vir-
tually impregnable. Piven of our far away Alaska it

can be said that, although at present a possession of
doubtful value, it is at least mainly on this continent
and may at some future time, when the inhabitants of
the Eritish possessions happily wish to unite with us, be
within our uninterrupted boundaries.

Compare now with our old acquisitions as to all these
important points those at present in view.

They are not continental, not contiguous to our
present domain, but beyond seas, the Philippines many
thousand miles distant from our coast. They are all
situated in the tropics, where people of the northern
races, such as Anglo-Saxons, or, generally speaking,
people of Germanic blood, have never migrated in
mass to stay; and they are more or less densely popu-
lated, parts of them as densely as Massachusetts — their
populations consisting almost exclusively of races to
whom the tropical climate is congenial — Spanish Cre-
oles mixed with negroes in the \\ est Indies, and Ma-
lays, Tagals, Filipinos, Chinese, Japanese, Negritos, and
Tarious more or less barbarous tribes in the Philippines.

When the question is asked whether we may hope
to adapt those countries and populations to our system
of government, the advocates of annexation answer
cheerily, that v/hen they belong to us, we shall soon
"Americanize" them. This may mean that Ameri
cans in sufficiently large numbers will migrate there to
determine the character of those populations so as to
assimilate them to our own.

This is a delusion of the first magnitude. We shall,
mdeed, be able, if we go honestly about it, to accomplish
several salutary things in those countries. But one thing
we cannot do. We cannot strip the tropical climate ot
those qualities which have at all times deterred men of
the northern races, to which we belong, from migrating
to such countries in mass, and to make their homes
there, as they have migrated and are still migrating to
countries in the temperate zone. This is not a mere
theory, but a fact of universal experience.

It is true, you will find in tropical regions a sprink-
ling of persons of Anglo-Saxon or other northern ori-

gin — merchants, railroad builders, speculators, profes-
sional men, miners, and mechanics, a; so here andtliere
an agriculturist. }3ut their ntin^lrcr is small, and nicsr
of them expect to go home aj;ar.:i as soon as their
money-mainng- purpcse is more or "ij.ss accomplished.

Thus \vc observe now that busines:; men with plenty
of means ar^- castmg- their eyes upon our "new posses-
.sions" to establish mercantile houses there, or manu-
factories to be worked with native labor: and moneyed
syndicates and " imp;"Ovemen': companies" to exploit
the resources c'i tho^e countries, and speculators and
{Dromotors to take advantage of what may turn up — tlve
iTanchise grabber, as reported, is already there — many
having perfect^ legitimate ends in view, others
ends not so legitimate, and all expecting to be more or
less favored by the power of our government; in short,
the capitalist is thinking of going there, or to send his
agents, his enterprises in most cases to be directed from
these more congenial shores. But you will find that
laboring men of the northern races, as they have never
done so before, will not now go there in mass to do the
work of the country, agricultural or industrial, and to
fotmd there permanent homes; and this is not merely
because the rate of wages in such countries is, owing to
native competition, usually low, but because they can-
not thrive there under the climatic conditions.

But it is the working-masses, those laboring in agri-
culture and the industries, that every v.^here form the
bulk of the population; and they are the true constitu-
ency of democratic government. And as the northern
races cannot do the work of the tropical zone, they
cannot furnish such constituencies. It is an incontesta-
ble and very significant fact that the British, the best
cx)lonizers in history, have, indeed, established in tropi-
cal regions governments and rather absolute ones, bai
they have never succeeded in establishing there demc-
craiic commonwealths oi the nnglo- Saxon type, like
those in America or Australia.

The scheme of Americanizing our "new posv-
sessions ' in that sense is tlierefort absolutely hopeless.

The immutable forces of nature are against tt. What-
ever v."c may do for iheir improvement, the peopi i of
the Spanish Antilles will remam in overwhelming
aumerical predominance, '.jpanish Creoles and negi'oes,
and the people of the Philippines, Filipinos, Malays,
Tagals, and so on — some of themi quite clever in their
way, but the vast majority utterly alien to us, not only
ill origin and language, but in habits, traditions, ways
of thinking, principles, ambitions — in short, in most
things that are of the greatest importance in human
intercourse and especially in political cooperation. And
under the influences of their tropical climate they will
prove incapable of becoming assimilated to the Anglo-
iaxon. They would, therefore, remain in the popula-
tion of this republic a hopelessly heterogeneous ele-
ment— in some respects more hopeless even than the
colored people now living among- us.

What, then, shall we do with such populations?
vShail we, according, not indeed to the letter, but to the
evident spirit of our constitution, organize those coun-
tries as territories with a view to their eventual admis-
sion as states ? If they become states on an equal foot-
ing with the other states they will not only be permit-
ted to govern themselves, as to their home concerns,
but they will take part in governing the whole republic,
in governing us, by sending senators and representa-
tives into our Congress to help make our laws, and by
voting for president and vice-president to give our
national government its execudve. The prospect oi:
the consequences which would follow the admission ot
the Spanish Creoles and the negroes of West India
islands and of the Malays and Tagals of the Philippines
ro participation in the conduct of our government is so
alarming that you instinctively pause before taking the
step.

But this may be avoided, it is said, by govemmg the
new possessions as mere dependencies, or subject prov-
inces. I will waive the constitutional question and
merely point out that this would be a most serious de-
parture from the rule that governed our form.er acquis-

itions, which are so frequently qiioted as precedents.
It is useless to speak of the District of Columbia and
Alaska as proof that we have done such things before
and can do them again. Every candid mind will at
once admit the vast diiference between those cases and
the pertnancnt establishment of substantially arbitrar}'
g-overnment over large territories with many millions
of inhabitanls, and v^^ith a prospect of there being many
more of the same kind, if we once launch out on a ca-
reer of conquest. The question is not merely whether
we can do such things, but whether, having the public
good at heart, we sJwuld do them.

If we do adopt such a system, then v\'e shall, for the
first time since the abolition of slavery, again have two
kinds of Americans : Americans of the first class, \i\\o
enjoy the privilege of taking part in the government in
accordance with our old constitutional principles, and
Americans of the second class, who are to be ruled in a
substantially arbitrary fashion by the Americans of the
first class, through congressional legislation and the
action of the national executive — not to speak of indi-
vidual " masters " arrogating to themselves powers be-
yond the law,

This will be a difference no better — nay, rather some-
what worse — than that which a century and a quarter
ago still existed between Englishmen of the first
and Englishmen of the second class, the first rep-
resented by King George and the British Parliament.
and the second by the American colonists. This differ-
ence called forth that great paean of human liberty, the
American Declaration of Independence — a document
which, I regret to say, seems, owing to the intoxication
of conquest, to have lost much of its charm among
some of our fellow citizens. Its fundamental princi-
ple was that "governments derive their just powers
from the consent of the governed." We are now told
that we have never fully lived up to that principle, and
that, therefore, in our new policy we may cast it aside
altogether. But I sa}' to you that, if we are true be-
lievers in democratic government, it is our duty to

move in the directiou towards the full reahzacion of
that principle and not in the direction away from it. If
you tell me that we cannot govern the people of those
new possessions in accordance with that principle, then
I answer that this is a good reason why this democracy
.should not attempt to govera them at all.

If we do, we shall transform the government
of the people, for the people, and by the peo-
ple, for which Abraham Lincoln lived, into a govern-
ment of one part of the people, the strong, over an-
other part, the weak. Such an abandonment of a fun-
damental principle as a permanent policy may at first
seem to bear only upon more or less distant dependen-
cies, but it can hardly fail in its ultimate effects to dis-
turb the rule of the same principle in the conduct of
democratic government at home. And I warn the
x\merican people that a democracy cannot so deny its
faith as to the vital conditions of its being — it cannot
long play the king over subject populations without
creating within itself ways of thinking and habits of
action most dangerous to its own vitality — most danger-
ous especially to those classes of society which are the
least powerful in the assertion, and the most helpless in
the defense of their rights. Let the poor and the men
v/ho earn their bread by the labor of their hands pause
and consider well before they give their assent to a pol-
icy so deliberately forgetful of the equality of rights.

I do not mean to say, however, that all of our new
acquisitions would be ruled as subject provinces.
Some of them, the Philippines, would probably remain
such, but some others would doubtless become states.
In Porto Rico, for instance, politicians of lively ambition
are already clamoring for the speedy organization of
that island as a regular territory, soon to be admitted as
a state of the Union. You may say that they will have
long to wait. Be not so sure of that. Consult your
ov/n experience. Has not more than cnc territory,
hardly fitted for statehood, been pr -'ipitated into the
Union as a state when the majority party in Congress
thought that, by doing so, its party strength could be

augmented in the senate and in the house and in the
electoral college? Have our parties become so unself-
ishly virtuous that this may not happen again? So we
may see Porto Rico admitted before we have bad tiiie
to T'ub our eyes.

You may say that little Porto Rico would not nuti-
ter much. Bui can any clear thinking man believe tliar,
when we are once fairly started in the course of in d' in-
criminate expansion, we shall stop there? Will not ihe
same reasons which induced us to take Porto Rico also
be used to show that the tv.-o islands of San Domingo
with Hayti, and of Cuba, which separate Porto Rico
from our coast, would, if they were in foreign hands, be
a danger to us, and that we miLst take them? Nothing
could be more plausible. Why, the necessity of annex-
ing vSan Domingo is already freely discussed, and agen-
cies to bring this about are actually at work. And as to
Cuba, every expansionist will tell you that it is only a
matter of time. And does any one believe that those
islands, if annexed, will not become states of this Union?
That would give us at least three, perhaps four, new
states, with about 3,500,000 inhabitants, Spanish and
French Creoles and negroes, with six or eight senators,
and from fifteen to twenty representatives in Congress
and a corresponding number of votes in the electoral
college.

Nor are we likely to stop there. If we build and
own the Nicaragua Canal, instead of neutralizing it, we
shall easily persuade ourselves that our control of that
canal will not be safe unless we own all the country
down to it, so that it be not separated from our borders
by any foreign, and possibly hostile power. Is this too
adventurous an idea to become true? Why, it is not
half as adventurous and extravagant as the idea of unit-
ing to this republic the Philippines, 9,000 miles away.
It is already proposed to acquire in som(i way strips of
territory several miles wide on each side of that canal
for its military protection. But that v/ill certainly be
found insufficient if foreign countries lie between. We
must, therefore, have those countries. That means

iviexico aua vajious si.irul ^'etiirai American repaljiics,
'vith a population in all or about 14,000,000, mostly
Spanish-Indian mixture — making at least nfteen states,
-vnlicled to tiiirty senators aud scores of representatives
and presidential electors.

As to the character of the people v/hom those sena-
cors, members, and presidential electors are to represent,
I will let an authority speak that may astonish 3''ou, con-
sidering- his present position — the Hon. Whitelaw Reid,
who said in a public address at the tmie when the an-
nexation of San Domingo was under discussion :

" This land greed of the Anglo-Saxon race is still at
work. We have absorbed the best part of Mexico, but
v'/e have plenty of propagandists, mainly in the army,
and with influential voice near the head of the govern-
ment, clamorous for the rest. We have taken a foot-
hold in the West Indies ; it will be of God's mercy if
vve do not find the v/hole West Indian archipelago
crowded upon us to tax an already overloaded digestion.
What are we to do with the turbulent, treacherous, ill-
conditioned population.? They have shown no faculty
:or self-government hitherto ; and are we to precipitate
them in a mass into the already sufficiently-degraded
elements of our national suffrage? We are trying the
powers of Anglo-Saxon self-governing digestion upon
three millions of slaves ; are the gastric juices of the
body politic equal to the addition of the Mexicans, the
Santo Domingans, the Cubans, the * Conks ' of the Ba-
hamas, the Kanakas, and the rest of the inferior mixed
races of our outlying tropical and semi-tropical depen-
dencies? "

As Mr. Reid now advocates the annexation of Porto
Rico and the Philippines, he must have changed his
opinion, which he had a right to do. But I think he
substantially spoke the truth then, and if he now wants
the Philippines, his case clearly illustrates how far
people will be carried by the expansion fever when it
once fairly takes hold of them.

You may think that the introduction of more than
thirty men in our senate, over eighty in the lower

hous3 of our Congress, and much over one hundred
votes in our electoral college, to speak and act for the
mixture of Spanish, French, and negro blood on the
West India Islands, and for the Spanish and Indian
rnixLure on the continent south of us — for people utt'jrly
alien and mostly incapable of assimilation to us in their
'Topical habitation — to make cur laws and elect our
■presidents, and incidentally to help us lift up the Phil-
ippines to a higher plane of civilization — is too shocking
a proposition to be entertained for a moment, and that
our people v/ill resist it to the bitter end. No, they
will not resist it, if indiscriminate expansion has once
become the settled policy of the republic. They will
be told, as thej^ are told now, that we are in it and can-
not get honorably out of it ; that destiny, and Provi-
dence, and duty demand it ; that it would be cowardly
to shrink from our new responsibilities ; that those pop-
ulations cannot take care of themselves, and that it is
cur mission to let them have the blessing of our free in-
stitutions ; that we must have new markets for our
products ; that those countries are rich in resources,
and that there is plenty of money to be made by taking
them ; that the American people can whip anybody
and do anything they set out to do; and that "Old
Glory " should float over every land on which we can
lay our hands.

Those who have yielded to such cries once, will yield
to them again. Conservative citizens will tell them
that thus the homogeneousness of the people of the re-
public, so essential to the working of our democratic in-
stitutions, will be irretrievably lost ; that our race
troubles, already dangerous, will be infinitely aggra-
vated, and that the government of, by, and for the
people will be in imniinent danger of fatal demoraliza-
tion. They will be cried down as pusillanimous pessi-
mists, who are no longer American patriots. The
American people will be driven on and on by the force
of events as Napoleon was when started on his career of
limitless conquest. This is imperialism as now advo-
cated. Do we wish to prevent its excesses ? Then we

IS

must stop at the beginning, before lakmg Porto Rico.
If we take that island, not even to speak of the Philip-
pines, we shall have placed ourselves on the inclined
plane, and roll on and on, no longer masters of our own
will, until we have reached bottom. And where will
that bottom be ? Who knows ?

Our old acquisitions did not recjuire a material in-
crease of our army and navy. What of the new ? Ir
is generally admitted that we need verj^ considerable
adcations to our armaments on land and sea to restore
and keep order on the islands taken from Spain, and
then to establish our sovereignty there. This is a
ticklish business. In the first place, Spain has never
been in actual control and possession of a good many
of the Philippine islands, while on others the insur-
gent Filipinos had vv'ell-nigh destroyed the Spanish
povv-er when the treaty of Paris was made. The peo-
ple of those islands will either peaceably submit to
our rule or they will not. If they do not, and we
must conquer them by force of arms, we shall at once
ha/e war on our hands.

What kind of a war v/ill that be .? The Filipinos
fought against Spain for their freedom and indepen-
dence, and unless they abandon their recently pro-
claimed purpose, it is for their freedom and independ-
ence, that they will fight against us. To be sure, we
promise them all sorts of good things if they will con-
sent to become our subjects. But they may, and prob-
ably will prefer independence to foreign rule, no matter
what fair promises the foreign invader makes. For
to the Filipinos the American is essentially a for-
eigner, more foreign in some respects than even the
Spaniard was. Now, if they resist, what shall we
do ? Kill them ? Let soldiers marching under the
stars and stripes shoot them down ? Shoot them down
because they stand iip for their independence, just
as the Cubans, who are no better than they, fought
for their independence, to which we solemnly de-
clared them to be "of right" entitled? Look at
this calmly if voxi can.

The Americana volunteers, vvho rushed to arms by
the hundreds of thousands to fight for Cuban inde-
pendence, may not stomach this killing of Filipinos
fighting for tkcir independence. We shall have to
rely upon the regulars, the professional soldiers, and
we may need a good niany of them. As to the best
way to fill the ranks in the Philippines, General Mer-
ritt is reported to have spoken in a recent interview
published in the New York papers as follows :

" To my mind the permanent force should consist
of from 20,000 to 30,000 men. Of these 15,000 should
be American soldiers. The remainder of the troops
might be recruited from the Spaniards and Filipinos.
The latter have exhibited no desire to enlist thus far,
but there are many Spaniards there who have ex-
pressed a wish to wear the blue. They were impressed
with the good pay and treatment of our men, and I
think they would make good American soldiers. They
are brave and hardy, but have suffered for lack of dis-
cipline."

Of course, General Merritt spoke only as the pro-
fessional soldier, who has to take care of the army,
and I do not blame him. But the idea of engaging
the same Spaniards, who but recently fought us and
the Filipinos at the same time, to do the killing of the
same Filipinos for us, or at least to terrorize them into
subjection, because we want to possess their land, and
to do this under the stars and stripes — this idea is at
first sight a little startling. It may make the Hessians
of our Revolutionary War grin in their graves. If
anybody had predicted such a possibility a year ago,
every patriotic American would have felt an impulse to
kick him downstairs. However, this is imperialism. It
bids us not to be squeamish. Indeed, some of our fel-
fow-citizens seem already to be full of its spirit The
Hon. Cyrus A. Sulloway, a member of Congress from
New Hampshire, is reported to have said in a recent
interview: " The Anglo-Saxon advances into the new
regions with a Bible in one hand and a shotgun in the
other. The inhabitants of those regions that he cannot

convert witn the aid of the Bible anu orini^ uato his
markets, he gets rid of \vith tiie sliotgun. It is but
another demonstratioij oi the survival of the littesi, "
In other words, unless you worship as we conimar;d
you, and give us a prori cable trade, we shall have to
shoot you down. The bloodiest of the old Spani^V
conquerors, four centuries ago, could not have spoicei-
better. It has a strange sound in free America. Lei
ns hope that f.ie spread of this hideous brutality of
sentiment -iVill prove only a temporary epid.emi::, like
the influenza, and will yield again when the intoxica-
tion of victory subsides and our heads become cool
once more. If it does not, more shotguns will be
needed than Mr. Solloway may now anticipate.

If we take those new regions, we shall be wel^
entangled in that contest for territorial aggrandizement,
which distracts other nations and drives them far
beyond their original design. So it will be inevitably
with us. We shall w"ant new conquests to protect that
which we already possess. The greed of speculators
working upon our government, will push us from one
point to another, and we shall have new conflicts on our
hands, almost without knowing how we got into them.
It has always been so under such circumstances, and
always will be. This means more and more soldiers,
ships, and guns.

A singular delusion has taken hold of the minds ot
otherwise clear-headed men. It is that our new friend-
ship with England will serve firmly to secure the
world's peace. Nobody can hail that friendly feeling
between the two nations more warmly than I do, au'
I fervidly hope it will last. But I am profoimdly con-
vinced that if this friendship results in the two coun-
tries setting OT.it to gi'asp "for the Anglo-Saxon," a^:
the phrase is, v/hatever of the earth may be attain-
able— if they hunt in couple — they will surely soon fall
out about the game, and the first serious quarrel, or at
least one of the first, we shall have, will be with Great
Britain. And as familv feuds are the bitterest, that

i8

feud will be apt to become one ol' the most deplorable
in its consequences.

No nation is, or ought to be, unselfish, England,
in her friendly feeling toward us, is not inspired by
mere sentinier.tal benevolence. The anxious wish of
many Englislnrxen that we should take the Philippines
is not free from the consideration that, if we do so, we
shall for a long time depend on British friendship to
maintain our position on that field of rivalry, and that
Britain will derive ample profit from our dependence
on her. This was recently set forth with startling
candor by the London Saturday Reviezv, thus :

" Let us be frank and say outright that we expect
mutual gain in material interests from this rapproclie-
7iicnt. The American Commissioners at Paris are mak-
ing this bargain, whether they realize it or not, under
tiie protecting naval strength of England, and we shall
expect a material quid pro quo for this assistance. We
expect the United States to deal generously with
Canada in the matter of tariSs, and we expect to be
remembered when the United States comes into posses-
sion cf the Philippine Islands, and, above all, we
expect her assistance on the day, which is quickly
approaching, when the future of Chiiia comes up for
settlement, for the young imperialist has entered upon
a path where it will require a strong friend, and a
lasting friendship between the two nations can be
secured, not by frothy sentimentality on public plat-
forms, but by reciprocal advantages in solid, material
interests. "

And the cable dispatch from London bringing this
utterance added ;

"The foregoing opinion is certainly outspoken
enough, but every American moving in business circles
here knows this voices the expectations of the average
Englishman."

This is plain. If Englishmen think so we have no
fault to find with them. But it would be extremely
foolish on our part to close our eyes to the fact. British
friendship is a good thing to have, but, perhaps, not so

19

good a thing :o nead. If we are wise we shall not put
OMrselves in a situation in which we shall need it.
British statesmanship has sometimes shown great skill
in making other nations fight its battles. This is verj'
admirable from its point of view, but it is not so
pleasant for the nations so used. I should be loath to
see this republic associated with Great Britain in appar-
ently joint concerns as junior partner with a minority
interest, or the American navy in the situation of a
mere squadron of the British fleet. This would surely
lead to trouble in the settling of accounts. Lord
vSalisbury was decidedly right when, at the last lord
mayor's banquet, he said that the appearance of the
United States as a factor in Asiatic affairs was likely to
conduce to the interest of Great Britain, but might
-'not conduce to the interest of peace." Whether he
had eventual quarrels with this republic in mind, I do
aot know. But it is certain that the expression of
British sentiment I have just quoted shows us a
Pandora box of such quarrels.

Ardently desiring the maintenance of the friendship
between England and this republic, I cannot but
express the profound belief that this friendship will
remain most secure if the two nations do not attempt to
accomplish the same ends in the same way and on the
same field, but continue to follow the separate courses
prescribed by their peculiar conditions and their history.

The history of England is that of a small island,
Inhabited by a vigorous, energetic and rapidly multi-
plying race, with the sea for its given field of action.
Nothing could l^e more natural than that, as the popu-
lation pressed against its narrow boundaries. English-
men should have swarmed out, founding colonies and
gradually building up an empire of possessions scat-
tered all over the globe. England now must have the
most powerful fleet in the world, not only for the pro-
tection of her distant possessions, but because if any
other sea power, or combination of sea powers, could
effectually blockade her coasts, her people as they now
are, might be starved in a few months. England must

be the greatest sea power m order to be a great powtr
at all.

The American people began iheir career as one of
the colonial ofl'shoots of the English stock. They funnel
a grccLL continent to occupy and to fill with deniocratic
coiumonwealths. Oav country is large cu;High for
several times our present iiopnl: lion. Our liorne
resources are enormous, in gii-.ct pa]"t not yet touched.
We need not fear to be starved b}' the coujpletesc
blockade of our coasts, for v. e hare enough of eveiy-
thing and to spare. On the contrary such a blockade
might rather result in starving others that need our
products. We are to-day one of the greatest powers on
earth, without having the most powerful fleet, and
without stepping beyond our continent. We are sure
to be by far the greatest power of all, as our homogene-
ous, intelligent, and patriotic population multiplies, and
our resources are developed, without firing a gun or
sacrificing a life for the sake of conquest — far more
powerful than the British Empire with all its Hindoos,
and than the Russian Empire with all its Mongols. We
can exercise the most beneficent iniiuences upon man-
kind, not by forcing our rule or our goods upon others
that are weak at the point of the bayonet, but through
the moral power of our example, in proving how the
greatest as well as the smallest nation can carry on the
government of the people, by the people, and for the
people in justice, liberty, order, and peace without large
armies and navies.

Let this republic and Great Britain each follow the
course which its conditions and its history have assigned
to it, and their ambitions will not clash, and their friend-
ships can be maintained for the good of all. And if our
British cousins should ever get into serious stress,
American friendship may stand behind them ; but then
Britain would depend on our friendship, which, as an
American, I should prefer, and not America on British
friendship, as our British friends who so impatientl}'
urge us to take the Philippines, would have it. But if
A"e do take the Philippines, and thus entangle ourselvc.

in the rivalries of Asiatic aiiairs, the future will be, as
Lord Salisbury predicted, one of wars and rumors of
wars, and the time will be forever past when we could
look dov:n with condescending" pity on the nations of
the old world groaning' under militarism with jU its
burdens.

We are already told that we shall need a regular army
of at least 100,000 men, three-fourths of whom are to
serve in our "nev.' possessions." The question is
whether this necessity is only to be temporary or per-
manent. Look at the cost. Last year the support of
the army proper required about $23,000,000. It is com-
puted that, taking the increased costliness of the service
in the tropics into account, the army under the new dis-
pensation will require about $150,000,000; that is,
|i 27,000,000 a year more. It is also officially admitted
that the possession of the Philippines would render in-
dispensable a much larger increase of the navy than
would otherwise be necessar>^, costing untold millions
for the building- and equipment of ships, and untold
millions every year for their maintenance and for the
increased number of officers and men. What we shall
have to spend for fortifications and the like cannot now
be computed. But there is a burden tipon us which in
like weight no other nation has to bear. To-day, thirty-
three years after the Civil War, we have a pension roll
of very nearly one million names. And still they come.
We paid to pensioners over $145,000,000 last year, a
sum larger than the annual cost of the whole military
peace establishment of the German Empire, including
its pension roll. Our recent Spanish War will, accord-
ing to a moderate estimate, add at least $20,000,000 to
our annual pension payments. But if we send troops
to the tropics and keep them there, we must look for a
steady stream of pensioners from that quarter, for in
the tropics soldiers are "used up" very fast, even if
they have no campaigning to do.

But all such estimates are futile. There may, and
probably will be, much campaigning to do to keep our
new subjects in obedience, or even in confliets with

other powers. And what niiiitary and naval expedi-
tions will then cost, with onr extra.vagant habits, and
how the pension roll then will grow, we know to be in-
calculable. Moreover, we shall then be in the situa-
tion Oi those European pov/ers, the extent of whose ar
maments are determined, not by their own wishes, but
by the armaments of their rivals. We, too, shall nerv-
ously watch reports from abroad telling us that this
power is augmenting the number of its warships, or
that another is increasing its battalions, or strengthen-
ing its colonial garrisons in the neighborhood of onr
far-away possessions ; and w^e shall have to follow suit.
Not we ourselves, but our rivals and possible enemies
wall decide how large our armies and navies must be,
and how much money we must spend for them. And
all that money will have to come out of ttie pockets of
our people, the poor as well as the rich. Our tax-paying
capacity and willingness are indeed ver\" great. But set
your policy of imperialism in full swing, as the acqui-
sition of the Philippines will do, and the time will come,
and come quickly, when every American farmer and
workingman, when going to his toil, will, like his Euro-
pean brother, have ' ' to carry a fully armed seldier on
his back."

O ur government has agreed to appear in the ' * Peace-
and Disarmament Conference " called by the Russian
czar. What will our representative have to say when
the Russian spokesman, as the czar has done, truth-
fully describes the ever-growing evils of militarism,
and the necessity of putting a stop to them in the in-
terest of civilization and of the popular welfare ? The
American imperialist, whatever fine phrases he may
employ, will have to say substantially this: "All you
tell us about the niinous effects of increasing arma-
ments and the necessity of stopping them in the interest
of civilization and the popular welfare was our own
belief some time ago. But we Americans have recently
changed our minds. You, gentlemen, say that the
powers you represent would disarm if they could, and
that gereral disarrr.air'ent might be possible if one

23

power would resolutely begin to disarm. But we
Americans are just beginning to arm. You say that
this will put another difficulty in the way of general
disarmament. But we Am.ericans have, by way of lib-
erating Cuba, won b}^ conquest some islands in both
hemispheres, to which we may wish to add, and this
business will require larger armies and navies than we
now have."

This is the voice of American imperialism. And
thus our great and glorious republic, which once boasted
of marching in the vanguard of progi'essive civilization,
will deliberately go to the rear, and make of itself a
new obstacle to a reform, the success of which would
do infinitely more for the general good of mankind than
we could accomplish by a hundred victories of our arms
on land or sea.

It would seem, therefore, that the new territorial
acquisitions in view are after all very different from
those we have made before. But something more is to
be said. When the Cuban affair approached a crisis,
President McKinley declared in his message that
"forcible annexation cannot be thought of" for "it
would, by our code of morals, be criminal aggression. "
And in resolving upon the war against Spain, Congress,
to commend that war to the public opinion of mankind,
declared with equal emphasis and solemnity that the
war was, from a sense of duty and humanity, made spe-
cifically for the liberation of Cuba, and that Cuba ' ' is,
and of right ought to be, free and independent. " If
these declarations were not sincere, they were base and
disgraceful acts of hypocrisy. If they were sincere at
the time, would they not be turned into such disgraceful
acts of hypocrisy by subsequently changing the war,
professedly made from motives of duty and humanity,
into a war of conquest and self-aggrandizement ? It is
pretended that these virtuous promises referred to Cuba
only. But if President McKinley had said that, while
the forcible annexation of Cuba would be criminal
aggression, the forcible annexation of anything else
would be perfectly right, and if Congress had declared

that as to Cuba the war would be one of mere Lhity,
humanity, and liaeralion, but that we woa d tix e oy
conquest whatever else we could lay our hands on,
v.-Quld not all mankind have broken out in a shout of
scornful derision !

I ask in all candor, taking President Mctvinley at his
word: Will the forcible annexation of the Phillippincs
by our code of morals not be criminal ag-gression — a
self-confessed crime ? I ask further, if the Cubans, au
Congress declared, are and of right ought to be free and
independent, can anybody tell me why the Porto Ricans
and the Filipinos ought not of right to be free and inde-
pendent ? Can you sincerely recognize the right to
freedom and independence of one and refuse the same
right to another in the same situation, and then take
his land ? Would not that be double-dealing of the
most shameless sort ?

We hear much of the respect of mankind for us
having been greatly raised by our victories. Indeed,
the valor of our soldiers and the brilliant achievements
of our navy have won deserved admiration. But do not
deceive yourselves about the respect of mankind.
Recently I found in the papers an account of the public
opinion of Eiirope, written by a prominent English
journalist. This is what he says: "The friends of
America wring their hands in unaffected grief over the
fall of the United States under the temptation of the
lust of territorial expansion. Her enemies shoot out
the lip and shriek in derision over what they regard as
the unmistakable demonstration which the demand for
the Philippines aifords of American cupidity, American
bad faith and American ambition. ' We told you so, '
they exclaim. That is what the unctuous rectitude of
the Anglo-Saxon always ends in. He always begins by
calling heaven to witness his unselfish desire to help his
neighbor, but he always ends by stealing his spoons!"

Atrocious, is it not? And yet this is substantially
what the true friends of America, and what her enemies
in Europe, think — I mean those friends who had faith
in the nobility of the American people, who loved our

25

republican government, and who hoped that the exam-
ple set by our great democracy, would be an inspiration.
to those struggling for liberty the world over ; and I
mean those enemies v/ho hate republican government
and who long to see the American people disgraced and
huraiiiated. So they think: I know it from my own
coiTespondence. Nothing has in our times discredited
the name of republic in the civilized world as much as
the Dreyfus outrage in France and our conquest furor
in Am^erica; and our conquest furor more, because from
us the v/orld hoped m.ore.

No, do not deceive 3-ourselves. If we turn that war
which was so solemnly commended to the favor of
mankind as a generous war of liberation and humanity
into a victory for conquest and self-aggrandizement,
we shall have thoroughly forfeited our moral credit
with the world. Professions of unselfish virtue and
benevolence, proclamations of noble humanitarian
purposes coming from us will never, never be trusted
again. Is this the position in which this great republic
of ours should stand among the family of nations?
Our American self-respect should rise in indignant
protest against it.

And now compare this picture of the state of things
which threatens us, with the picture I drew of our con-
dition existing before the expansion fever seized us.
Which will you choose?

What can there be to justify a change of policy
fraught with such direful consequences ? Let us pass
the arguments of the advocates of such imperialism
candidly in review.

The cry suddenly raised that this great country has
become too small for us is too ridiculous to demand an
answer, in view of the fact that our present population
may be tripled and still have ample elbow-room, v/ith
resources to support many more. But we are told that
our industries are gasping for breath ; that we are suf-
fering from over-production; that our products must
have new outlets, and that we need colonies and
dependencies the world over to give us more markets.

MoremarkeLa? Certainly. But do we, civilized beings
indulge in tlie absurd and barbarous notion that we
must own the countries with which we wish to trade ?
Here are our official reports before us, telling us that of
late years our export trade has grown enormously, not
only of farm products, but of the products of our manu-
facturing industries; in fact, that "our sales of m^anu-
factured goods have continued to extend with a facility
and prompitude of results which have excited the seri-
ous concern of countries that, for generations, had not
only controlled their home markets, but had practically
monopolized certain lines of trade in other lands."

There is a distinguished Englishman, the Right
Hon. Charles T. Ritchie, President of the Board of
Trade, telling a British Chamber of Commerce that
"we (Great Britain) are being rapidly overhauled in
exports by other nations, especially the United States
and Germany," their exports fast advancing, while
British exports are declining. What? Great Britain,
the greatest colonial power in the world, losing in com-
petition v/ith two nations one of which had, so far, no
colonies or dependencies at all, and the other none of
any commercial importance ? What does this mean ?
It means that, as proved by the United States and Ger-
many, colonies are not necessary for the expansion of
trade, and that, as proved by Great Britain, colonies do
not protect a nation against a loss of trade. Our trade
expands, without colonies or big navies, because we
produce certain goods better and in proportion cheaper
than other people do. British trade declines, in spite of
immense dependencies and the strongest navy, because
it does not successfully compete with us in that respect.
Trade follows, not the flag, but the best goods for the
price. Expansion of export trade and new markets !
We do not need foreign conquests to get them, for we
have them, and are getting them more and more in
rapidly increasing growth.

"But the Pacific Ocean, "we are mysteriously told,
' ' will be the great commercial battlefield of the future,
and we must quickly use the present opportunity to

secnre our position on it. The visible presence of great
power is necessaiy for lis to get our share of the trade
of China. Therefore, we must have the Philippines."
Well, the China trade is worth having, although for a
time out of sig'ht the Atlantic Ocean will be an infinitely
more important battlefield of commerce than the Pacific,
and one European customer is worth more than twenty
cr thirty Asiatics. But does tlie trade of China really
require that we should have the Philippines and make
a great display of power to g-et our share ? Read the
consular reports, and you will find that in many places
in China our trade is rapidly gaining, while in some
British trade is declining, and this wiiile Great Britain
had on hand the greatest display of power imaginable
and we had none. And in order to increase our trade
there, our consuls advise us to improve our commercial
methods, saying nothing of the necessity of establishing
a base of naval operations, and of our appearing there
with war ships and heavy guns. Trade is developed,
not by the best guns, but by the best merchants. But
why do other nations prepare to fight for the Chinese
trade ? Other nations have done many foolish things
which we have been, and I hope will remain, wise
enough not to imitate. If it should come to fighting
for Chinese customers, the powers engaged m that fight
are not unlikely to find out that they pay too high a
price for what can be gained, and that at last the peace-
ful and active neutral will have the best bargain. At
any rate, to launch into all the embroilments of an
imperialistic policy by annexing the Philippines in order
to snatch something more of the Chinese trade would be
for us the foolish est game of all.

Generally speaking, nothing could be more irrational
than all the talk about our losing commercial or other
opportunities which ' ' will never come back if we fail to
grasp them nov/. " Why, we are so rapidly growing in
all the elements of power ahead of all other nations that,
not many decades hence, unless we demoralize ourselves
by a reckless policy of adventure, not one of them will
be able to resist our will if we choose to enforce it.

This the world knows, and is alarmed at the prospect.
Those who are most alarmed ma}' ^\dsh that we should
give them now, by some rash entei prise, an occasion ror
dealing us a damaging- blow while we are less irresistilile,

" Biit we must have coaling stations for our navy 1 "
Well, can we not get as many coaling stations as wc
need without owning populous countries behind tlicm
that would entangle us in dangerous political responsi-
bilities and complications ? Must Great Britain own tiie
whole of Spain in order to hold Gibraltar ?

" But we must civilize those poor people ! " Are we
not ingenious and charitable enough to do much for
their civilization without subjugating and ruling them
by criminal aggression ?

The rest of the pleas for imperialism consist mostly
of those high-sounding catch-words of which a free peo-
ple when about to decide a great question should be
especially suspicious. We are admonished that it is
time for us to become a "world power." Well, we arg
a world power now, and have been for many years
What is a world power ? A power strong enough to
make its voice listened to with deference by the world
whenever it chooses to speak. Is it necessary for a
world power, in order to be such, to have its finger in
every pie ? Must we have the Philippines in order to
become a world power? To ask the question is to
answer it.

The American flag, we are told, v/henever once
raised, must never be hauled down. Certainly, every
patriotic citizen will alwaj^s be read)'-, if need be, to light
and to die under his flag wherever it may wave injustice
and for the best interests of the country. But I say to
yen, woe to tlie republic if it should ever be without
citizens patriotic and brave enough to defy the dema-
gogues' cry and to haul down the flag wherever it may
be raised not in justice and not for the best interests of
the country. Such a republic would not last long.

But, they tell us, we have been living in a state of
contemptible isolation which must be broken so that we
may feel and conduct ourselves "as a full-grown mem-

ber of ihe iamily of natior;s. ' What is that so-caiied
isolation ? Is it commercial ? Last year our foreign
trade amounted to nearly 2000 million dollars, and is
i-apidty growing. Is that commercial isolation ? Or are
we politically isolated ? Remember our histor}^ Who
was it that early in this century broke up the piracy of
the Barbary States ? Who was it that took a leading
part in delivering the v/crld's commerce of the Danish
Sound dues ? Who v/as it that nrst opened Jap.a: to
communication v/ith the western world ? And what
power has in this century made more valuable contribu-
tions to international law than the United States ? Do
you call that contemptible isolation ? It is true, we did
not meddle much v/ith foreign affairs that did not concern
as. But if the circle of our interests widens and we
wish to meddle more, must we needs have the Philip-
pines in order to feel and conduct ourselves as a mem-
i)er of the family of nations ?

We are told that, having giown so great and strong,
we must at last cast off our childish reverence for the
I cachings of Washington's farewell address — those
" nursery rhymes that were sung around the cradle of
the republic " I apprehend that many of those who
now so flippantl}^ scoff at the heritage the Father of
his Country left us in his last words of admonition, have
never read that venerable document. I challenge those
who have, to show me a single sentence of general im-
])ort in it that would not as a wise rule of national con-
duct apply to the circumstances of to-day ! What is it
that has given to Washington's farewell address an
authority that was revered by all until our recent victo-
ries made so many of us drunk with wild ambitions ?
Not only the prestige of Washington's name, great as
that was and should ever remain. No, it was the fact
that under a respectful observance of those teachings
this republic has grown from the most modest begin-
nings into a Union spanning this vast continent; our
people have multiplied from a handful to 75 millions;
we have risen from poverty to a wealth the sum of
which tlie imagination can hardly grasp; this American

3°

nation has become one of the greatest and most [jow-
ertul on earth, and, continuing in the same course, will
surely become the greatest and most powerful of nil.
Not Washington's name alone gave his teachings thci)-
dignity and weight. It was the practical results of hiS
policy that secured to it, until now, the intelligent
approbation of the American people. And unless we
have completely lost our senses, Vv^e shall never despise
and reject as mere "nursery rhj^mes " the words of wi---
dom left us by the greatest of Americans, following
which the American people have achieved a splendor oV
developmient without parallel in the history of mankind.

You may tell me that this is all very well, but thj.i;
by the acts of our ov/n governmient we are nov/ in this
annexation business, and how can we get decently out
of it ? I answer that the difliculties of getting out of it
may be great; but that they are infinitely less great
than the difficulties we shall have Lo contend with if we
stay in it.

Looking them in the face, let us first clear our mindjj
of confused notions about our duties and responsibilities
in the premises. That our victories have devolved upon
us certain duties as to the people of the conquered
islands, I readily admit. But are they the only duties
we have to perform, or have they suddenly become par-
amount to all other duties ? I deny it. I deny that the
duties we owe to the Cubans and the Porto Ricans and
the Filipinos and the Tagals of the Asiatic islands ab-
solve us from our duties to the 75 millions of our own
people and to their posterity. I deny that they oblige
us to destroy the moral credit of our own republic by
turning this loudly heralded war of liberation and
humanity into a land-grabbing game and an act or
criminal aggression. I deny that they compel us to
aggravate our race troubles, to bring upon us the con-
stant danger of war, and to subject our people to the
galling burden of increasing armaments. If we have
rescued those unfortunate daughters of Spain, the colo-
nies, from the tyranny of their cruel father, I deny that we
are therefore in honor bound to marry any of the girls,

or to take tlieiu all into our household, where they m.iy
disturb and demoralize our whole family. I deny that
the liberation of those Spanish dependencies morally con-
strains us to do anything that would put our highest mis-
sion to solve the great problem of democratic government
m jeopardy, or that would otherwise endanger the vital
interests of the republic. Y/hatever our duties to them
may be, our duties to our own country and people stand
first; and from this scandpoint we have, as sane men
and patriotic citizens, to regard our obligation to take
care of the future of those islands and their people.

They fought for deliverance from Spanish oppression,
and we helped them to obtain that deliverance. Thai
deliverance they understood to mean independence. I
repeat the question whether anybody can tell me why
the declaration of Congress that the Cubans of right
ought to be free and independent should not apply to all
of them } Their independence, therefore, would be the
natural and rightful outcome. This is the solution of
the problem first to be taken in view.

It is objected that they are not capable of inde-
pendent government. They may answer that this is
their affair and that they are at least entitled to a trial
I frankly admit that if they are given that trial, their
conduct in governing themselves will be far from per-
fect. V/ell, the conduct of no people is perfect, not
even our own. They may try to revenge themselves
upon their tories in their Revolutionary War. But we,
too, threw our tories into hideous dungeons during our
Revolutionary War and persecuted and drove them
away after its close. They may have bloody civil broils.
But we, too, have had our Civil War which cost hun-
dreds and thousands of lives and devastated one-half of
our land; and now we have in horrible abundance the
killings by lynch law, and our battles at Virden. They
may have troubles with their wild tribes. So had we,
and we treated our wild tribes in a manner not to be
proud of. They may have corruption and rapacity in
their government, but Havana and Ponce may get
municipal adM-inistration almost as good as New York

has under 'i'-'^mnany rule; anci Ivir-.niJa may secure :;
;.'ity council not nitich less virtuous than that of Chicag'o.

I y i.y tiiese things not in a spirit of le^-it3', well iin-
(ier~t.;uding" the ditierence; but I say them seriously to
remind you that, Vv^hen we speak of the gfovernnient
those islands should iiave, we carn.or reasonably set up
:T.andards whiLh arc not reached even hy the m.ost civil-
i;:ed people, and v/hich in tb.:)se re^^vions could not be
reached, even if we ourselves conducted their govern-
ment with our best available st^.tesmanship. Our atten-
tion is in these days frequentl)" called to the adm.irable
and in many respects successful administrative mxa-
chinery introdivced by Great Britain in India. Biit it
must not be forgotten that this rnaLhiuery was evolved
from a ceatiiry of mpine, corruption, disastrous blun-
ders, savage struggles, and murderous revolts, and that
t;ven now many wise men in England gravely doubt in
their hearts whether it was best for their country to
undertake the conquest of India at all, and are troubled
by gloomy forebodings of a calamitous catastrophe that
may some day eng-ulf that splendid fabric of Asiatic
dominion.

No, we cannot expect that the Porto Ricans, the
Cubans, and the Filipinos will maintain orderly govern-
ments in Anglo-Saxon fashion. But they may succeed
in establishing a tolerable order of things in their o\\m
fashion, as Mexico, after many decades of turbulent
disorder, succeeded at last, under Porfirio Diaz, in hav-
ing a strong and orderly government of her kind, not.
indeed, such a government as we would tolerate in thii-
Union, but a government answering Mexican character
and interests, and respectable in its relations with the
outside world.

This will become all the more possible if, withoiit
annexing and ruling those people, we simply put them
on their feet, and then give them the benefit of that
humanitarian spi.it v/hicli, as we claim, led us into the
war for the liberation of Cuba. To this end we should
keep our troops on the islands only imtil their people have
constrncted governments and organized forces of their

33

own for the maintenance of orclcr. Our military occu-
pation should not be kept up as long- as possible, but
should be withdrawn as soon as possible.

The Philippines may, as Belgium and Switzerland
are in Europe, be covered by a guarantee of neutrality
on the part of the powers most interested in that region
— an agreement which the diplomacy of the United
States should not find it difficult to obtain. This would
secure them against foreign aggression. As to the inde-
pendent republics of Porto Rico and Cuba, our govern-
ment might lend its good offices to unite them with San
Domingo and Hayti in a confederacy of the Antille-, to
give them a more respectable international standing.
Stipulations should be agreed upon with them as to open
ports and the freedom of business enterprise with'n their
borders, affording all possible commercial facilities.
Missionary effort in the largest sense, as to the develop-
ment of popular education and of other civilizing agen-
cies, as well as abundant charity in case of need, will on
our part not be wanting, and all this will help to miti-
gate their disorderly tendencies and to steady their gov-
ernments.

Thus we shall be their best friends without being
their foreign rulers. We shall have done our duty to
tliem, to ourselves, and to the world. However imper-
fect their governments may still remain, they will at
least be their own, and they will not with their disorders
and corruptions contaminate our institutions, the integ-
rity of which is not only to ourselves, but to liberty-
loving mankind, the most important concern of ail. We
may then await the result with generous patience — with
the same patience with which for many years we v/it-
nessed the revolutionary disorders of Mexico on our very
borders, without any thought of taking her government
into our own hands.

Ask yourselves whether a policy like this will not
raise the American people to a level of moral greatness
never before attained! If this democracy, after all the
intoxication of triumph in war, conscientiously remem-
bers its professions and pledges, and. soberly reflects

34

on its duties to itself and others, and then dehberately
resists the temptation of conquest, it will achieve the
grandest triumph of the democratic idea that history-
knows of. It will give the government of, for, and by
the people a prestige it never before possessed. It will
render the cause of civilization throughout the world a
service without parallel. It will put its detractors to
shame, and its voice will be heard in the council of
nations with more sincere respect and more deference
than ever. The American people, having given proof
of their strength and also of their honesty and wisdom,
will stand infinitely mightier before the world than any
number of subjugated vassals could make them. Are
not here our best interests, both moral and m-aterial ?
Is not this genuine glory ? Is not this true patriotism ?
I call upon all who so believe never to lose heart in
the struggle for this great cause, whatever odds may
seem to be against us. Let there be no pusillanimous
yielding while the final decision is still in the balance.
Let us relax no effort in this, the greatest crisis the
republic has ever seen. Let us never cease to invoke
the good sense, the honesty, and the patriotic pride of
the people. Let us raise high the flag of our country —
not as an emblem of reckless adven.ure and greedy con-
qiiest, of betrayed professions and broken pledges, of
criminal aggressions and arbitrary nile over subject
populations — but the old, the true flag, the flag of George
Washington and Abraham Lincoln, the flag of the
government of, for, and by the people ; the flag of
national faith held sacred and of national honor unsullied ;
the flag of human rights and of good example to all
nations ; the flag of true civilization, peace, and good-
will to all men. Under it let us stand to the last, what-
ever betide.

TmS IS A PHOTOCOPY REPRODUCTION

It is made in compliance with copyright law
and produced on acid-free archival

book weight paper

which meets the requirements of

ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992

Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials

Preservation photocopying

by

The University of Connecticut Libraries

Preservation Deparhnent

2001

Univer^fly of Cojuicclicut
'libraries

1 ^ 1 Q

University of
Connecticut

Libraries

39153027628926